You don't terminate key employees quickly on a whim without grounds when you have part of the story 2 minutes after you discover or suspect an anomaly. It takes time IMO. You internally investigate it as announced as there is a internal and possible external process and you refer to lawyers , board etc etc.
Take some fluff out and read the bits that justify outcome of termination notices.
"through an internal audit and review process"
"The review highlighted non-compliance in HR and operational controls"
then
"Board will continue to keep the market informed of developments and any financial impact"
to muddy the waters they come up with
"Given the combined effect of these factors, the Board expects that issuance of breach notices is likely to be impacted in Q4 by approximately 25%"
This which when you know the history and can look back at weather events know that lets say a couple of weeks of snow and a heatwave as well in some areas doesn't impact your quarter by 25% ( that is your whole business not just UK ) so something does and leaving the door open for further impairment IMO. How convenient a opportunity to put out some weather bad news - wonder if and when that would have been announced if this staff termination had not happened.
So what in HR Human resources can go wrong- employing relatives, ghost employees, creating bonuses triggers , paying pension $ to own account - never ending possibilities or could be something innocent and simple just unethical ??
Now at a operational level - something that would affect the reputation and trust in the whole company - like fraud, bribes, backhanders, related entity dealing, share trading, lying , falsifying contract details , theft, fraud or something simple and innocent that could not be remedied with usual warnings and not seen by normal compliance checks?
Just really depends at what level the offenses happened at and if they got the chop because they didn't spot the issues or they were involved in them or are they the fall guys for poor oversight but both at once could be collusion in some way?.
What should be pointed out that this isn't the first time this company has seen issues in regards to it's UK business.
Until they come a bit clean it is not good look and as for you comment regarding they are trying to protect shareholder value- yeah a slow drip of news or a ignoring shareholders when industry participants probably knows what has gone on will be a good thing fr shareholders?
Affect on SPZ- think about all the leads and partial completed contracts that SPZ is involved in that would have been led by those 2 and what happens when a new bloke walks in to try and complete and then once recruited another new guy walks in?
Bottom line is they investigated enough to make a conclusion and turfed the 2 blokes out and want to drip feed shareholders IMO .
I hope the ASX asks for a full timeline of actions regarding this investigation of termination and also weather and what $ number relates to each. If weather is 99% it is different to weather being 1% or contracts lost 99% or 1% for example makes a difference going forward. More detail since they get daily data of parking numbers and breaches so creating a 25% quarterly impairment to whole company revenue be announced at the same time?
Lots of red flags until they clarify and I would be surprised if a ASX notice hasn't been sent since such a large fall on the news.
(20min delay)